Some nations have outright banned nicotine pouches, while others have taken what seems like a softer approach. However, on closer look, some of these recent policies are a ban in all but name.
Let’s take a look at what’s happening in Canada and Luxembourg where the difference between a ban and permissive regulation is paper thin.
Friction
Friction is an essential concept in user experience (UX). It refers to anything your software does to hinder, slow down, or frustrate your user in achieving their goal. The lower the friction, the better the outcomes for product adoption.
However, as we all know, what works in private enterprise doesn’t always translate to the world of bureaucracy. Here are two troubling recent examples.
Canada
As we’ve covered before, Health Canada approved ZONNIC nicotine pouches, albeit only at 4 mg strength. Obviously, it would be better for consumer choice if people had pouches at strengths that align with other jurisdictions, but at least Canadians had some choice.
Of course, the minute ZONNIC pouches were approved, Canada’s healthcare zealots sprang into action, with the usual tired rhetoric about protecting the kids. Within a year, the oddball Health Minister Mark Holland was celebrating pouches being forced behind the pharmaceutical counter.
While Canada has many built-up urban areas, it’s also known for its vast stretches of remote regions. Research suggests that rural Canadians are at least 1.3x more likely to smoke cigarettes. Sadly, the people who need the option of nicotine pouches are the most likely to suffer from low access, as shown in a recent article in the Western Standard.
As stated in the article:
A survey of pharmacies across Canada shows significant gaps in where people can buy nicotine pouches. In some places, smokers have to drive for hours to find a pharmacy that sells them.
In the worst cases, gaps between pharmacies are as much as an 8 to 12 hour drive. This, it’s fair to say, is beyond friction. For rural Canadian citizens who want to quit smoking via nicotine pouches, Mark Holland’s regulations are an effective ban.
In fact, I’d go further and say the situation is a picture perfect representation of people in ivory towers making decisions that affect people who they don’t even understand exist.
Luxembourg
The next example of outrageous governance comes to us from Luxembourg. Landlocked between Belgium, Germany, and France, the charming Western European country has announced updates to its tobacco laws.
As reported by PouchForum, “article 7.4 bans the marketing and sales of nicotine pouches containing more than 0.048mg of nicotine per pouch.” These levels are preposterously low, and all but eliminate nicotine pouches as a useful or credible product.
Again, the Luxembourg situation is an example of pretending that you’re not banning a product, but effectively banning it. I mean, seriously, what producer can even comply with these levels?
The average cigarette contains 10-12 mg of nicotine. People who smoke absorb around 1-1.5mg per stick. The bioavailability of pouches is between 50-80%, so taking a 0.048mg pouch means consuming between 0.024mg and 0.0384mg. By my calculation, you’d need about 26 pouches to hit 1mg of nicotine. It’s just madness.
Final thoughts
The situations in Canada and Luxembourg show precisely why regulators need to speak to consumers before they make decisions that affect their lives. Both policies have taken perfectly good stop smoking products and rendered them ineffective or out of reach.
